Curiouser and curiouser

I read Kathleen Nielson's very gracious and helpful post To My Egalitarian Friends.  I enjoyed it very much.  Earlier, I read D.A. Carson's post What is Wrong With Patriarchy?  I also liked that post.  Carson is an excellent communicator.

What is strange about these two posts is that Carson's comments box was filled with debate over the issue.  Those who disagreed with him were very active there;  148 comments active, the last time I checked.  Nielson's post?  There are six comments.  Now, the fact that there was not a lot of dissent in there is actually kind of nice.  The issues polarize people, so this is a good thing.  But where were the comments from those opposed to complementarianism saying to Nielson, "Thanks for being gracious?"  The title of her post was directed to egalitarians.  Where are the voices saying, "Yes, I agree we need to find some common ground?"  I found that curious, indeed.

Frankly, I've noticed that there are certain people, egalitarian and complementarian alike, who use the comment box merely for tearing down as opposed to building up.  No matter what your theology is, there are simply people who live to agitate, and not always in a good way.  Some people just thrive in situations of debate and conflict.  Sometimes, the beginning of diffusing a controversy is to stop criticizing and look for evidences of grace. 

Comments

[Diane]

Yup!